What...

Kinja'd!!! "PushToStart" (pushtostart)
11/22/2013 at 10:49 • Filed to: None

Kinja'd!!!0 Kinja'd!!! 23
Kinja'd!!!

What are those ugly red bars on the back of the (I think) 2011 Honda Accord? They aren't part of the taillights, and I don't understand why they are there. Are they like, reflector strips? Don't the taillights have reflectors built into them...? They're ugly as hell and don't seem to serve any purpose...


DISCUSSION (23)


Kinja'd!!! anothermiatafanboy > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 10:52

Kinja'd!!!0

when that generation accord came out it was panned for its (obviously) narsty looks. Honda made changes during the mid cycle refresh, including a smaller grill and that added to the taillights, I believe in an attempt to make it look lower and sleeker. IMHO, both just served to make the car even more homely.


Kinja'd!!! ttyymmnn > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 10:52

Kinja'd!!!3

They are reflector strips, they are ugly as hell, and they serve no purpose.

Gotta say, I'm not too crazy about that rear end. I think Honda nailed it on the Civic, though.

Kinja'd!!!


Kinja'd!!! RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 10:53

Kinja'd!!!0

Doesn't look like they reserved much room in the taillights for reflectors - but I suspect "addled senior designer on a bender" is a more likely explanation than "well, gee, we need more reflector area".


Kinja'd!!! Sn210 > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 10:56

Kinja'd!!!0

To give it that "retro" look

Kinja'd!!!


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 10:57

Kinja'd!!!0

Kinja'd!!!

Federal and State DOT regulations state there must be a minimum surface area of reflector material on the rear of a car. This was most recently an issue in MD where an officer pulled over the driver of a Pontiac G8 and cited him for rear-facing reflectors below the minimum State threshold, even though the tail lights were stock and DOT approved. Taking his case to court, the judge upheld the ticket and stated the vehicle was in violation of state law.


Kinja'd!!! PushToStart > ttyymmnn
11/22/2013 at 10:58

Kinja'd!!!0

Agreed on the Civic. The most offensive part about the Accord is that they didn't even try to make the shape of the reflectors integrate into the taillights, they're just kind of there...


Kinja'd!!! Sn210 > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 10:59

Kinja'd!!!1

Wow, that's ridiculous.


Kinja'd!!! Jagvar > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 11:00

Kinja'd!!!1

This case still makes me go "WTF?"

If the car is in violation of state law, then aren't the dealerships breaking the law by selling it in the state? And isn't the DMV in violation of state law by registering it in the state? Also, why single this guy out? Why not issue tickets to every G8 owner in the state of Maryland?


Kinja'd!!! My hovercraft is full of eels > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 11:02

Kinja'd!!!0

LOL At first glance I thought it was a "Bangle-7" (E65). It's that ugly.


Kinja'd!!! GhostZ > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 11:05

Kinja'd!!!0

Kinja'd!!!

This is the last attempt to make the rear end not look like every other car on the market .


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > Jagvar
11/22/2013 at 11:07

Kinja'd!!!0

Because sometimes cops can be assholes. Not all the time as I have found but still the wrong day or at the wrong time a police officer might just want to pull some obscure law out of his/her ass and ticket you for it.


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > Sn210
11/22/2013 at 11:07

Kinja'd!!!0

Yep. Hooray MD!


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > Jagvar
11/22/2013 at 11:07

Kinja'd!!!0

Because sometimes cops can be assholes. Not all the time as I have found but still the wrong day or at the wrong time a police officer might just want to pull some obscure law out of his/her ass and ticket you for it.


Kinja'd!!! Sn210 > Jagvar
11/22/2013 at 11:08

Kinja'd!!!0

Not to mention all of the 2008-2010 Accords that didn't have these reflector strips.


Kinja'd!!! PushToStart > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 11:19

Kinja'd!!!0

Wow, that's insane. The exterior design was not up to the owner, why is he being punished for it? Unbelievable...


Kinja'd!!! AMC/Renauledge > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 11:19

Kinja'd!!!0

No. That isn't it.

The 2008-10 Accord had plenty of reflective surface.

Honda just decided that the 2011-12 MCE needed some changes to the tail. They slapped a couple of ill-fitting reflectors on the trunk and, Voila! Instant MCE! Too bad it looked like shit.

It has nothing to do with the DOT, since the pre-facelifted Accord passed muster already.


Kinja'd!!! PushToStart > Sn210
11/22/2013 at 11:21

Kinja'd!!!0

Yeah, I believe the model year before that looked basically identical, just without the strips, which is also why I was so curious as to why they were added if the year before was ok.


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > AMC/Renauledge
11/22/2013 at 11:23

Kinja'd!!!0

Kinja'd!!!

I refuse to accept you answer because that would mean Honda stuck them on for literally no good god damn reason.


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 11:25

Kinja'd!!!0

Welcome to MD! Have some crabs and awful car regulation!


Kinja'd!!! AMC/Renauledge > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 11:45

Kinja'd!!!0

Welcome to Honda's design philosophies from the last 12 years.

Kinja'd!!!

Remember the saggy taillights on the 2003-07 Accord? Changed twice. 2003-04 ^

Kinja'd!!!

2005 ^

Kinja'd!!!

2006-07 ^


Kinja'd!!! Milky > PushToStart
11/22/2013 at 13:11

Kinja'd!!!0

Worst refresh in history. That is all there is to say.

Kinja'd!!!


Kinja'd!!! NaturallyAspirated > Party-vi
11/22/2013 at 15:59

Kinja'd!!!0

That ruling was reversed on appeal:

http://www.g8board.com/forums/showthr…


Kinja'd!!! Party-vi > NaturallyAspirated
11/22/2013 at 16:02

Kinja'd!!!0

Sweet! I had no idea!